The relation of multiple-schedule behavioral contrast to deprivation, time in session, and within-session changes in responding

Dynamic changes in reinforcer effectiveness: satiation and habituation have different implications for theory and practice

Reinforcers lose their effectiveness when they are presented repeatedly. Early researchers labeled this loss of effectiveness as satiation without conducting an experimental analysis. When such an analysis is conducted, habituation provides a more precise and empirically accurate label for the changes in reinforcer effectiveness. This paper reviews some of the data that suggest that habituation occurs to repeatedly presented reinforcers. It also argues that habituation has surprisingly different implications than satiation for theory and practice in behavior analysis. For example, postulating that habituation occurs to repeatedly presented reinforcers suggests ways for maintaining the strength of an existing reinforcer and for weakening the strength of a problematic reinforcer that differ from those implied by an account in terms of satiation. An habituation account may also lead to different ways of conceptualizing the regulation of behavior. For example, habituation may be a single-process contributor to the termination of behaviors that are usually attributed to satiation (e.g., ingestive behaviors such as eating and drinking), fatigue (e.g., energetic behaviors such as running), the waning of attention (e.g., cognitive behaviors such as studying), and pharmacodynamic factors (e.g., drug taking).

Daily consumption of individual snack foods decreases their reinforcing value

The reinforcing value of food is one factor that influences energy intake. The purpose of this study was to determine if the reinforcing value of highly liked snack foods could be modified by restriction or daily intake of individual preferred foods in the absence of changes in total energy intake. Food reinforcement was tested at baseline and after each of two, two-week phases. During the restriction phase, participants did not eat a target food or closely related foods while during the daily intake phase, participants consumed a 200-300 kcal portion of the target food daily. The reinforcing value of the target food significantly decreased after two weeks of daily intake. Restriction did not change food reinforcement. These data suggest that eating a portion of a highly palatable food every day decreases its reinforcing value. Implications for weight control are discussed.

Within-session patterns in variable-interval schedule performance: Variation with deprivation level

Previous research has shown that patterns in operant responding may change within the course of individual experimental sessions. The proper interpretation of such changes is controversial. At least one source of this controversy may lie in unstated experimental practices across laboratories, as published reports often have failed to detail important particulars of deprivation operations. The present study was aimed at gathering descriptive data on the contribution of deprivation operations to the observation of within-session changes. In two experiments, four food deprived pigeons were exposed to a multiple variable-interval 30-s variable-interval 30-s schedule of grain presentation, wherein each grain presentation was kept constant at 5s. In Condition I, a session-entry criterion was in place that permitted the pigeon access to the daily session only if its body weight fell within controlled limits. Within-session rates of responding were generally stable. In Condition II, the entry criterion was removed and experimental sessions were conducted 6 days per week. The effect of removing the session-entry criterion was to increase body weight for all birds and decrease food intake across conditions. With no session entry criterion, robust within-session changes were observed for three of the four pigeons. The results suggest that rich schedules of reinforcement often used in the analysis of within-session changes can produce substantial reductions in deprivation levels that require up to several days to reverse. Future experiments in this area should take precautions to insure that deprivation is tightly controlled and report such measures to eliminate potential errors in replication.

Varying reinforcer duration produces behavioral interactions during multiple schedules

The experiments tested the idea that changes in habituation to the reinforcer contribute to behavioral interactions during multiple schedules. This idea predicts that changing an aspect of the reinforcer should disrupt habituation and produce an interaction. Pigeons and rats responded on multiple variable interval variable interval schedules. Introducing variability into the duration of reinforcers in one component increased response rates in both components when the schedules provided high, but not low, rates of reinforcement. The increases in constant-component response rates grew larger as the session progressed. Within-session decreases in responding were smaller when the other component provided variable-, rather than fixed-, duration reinforcers. These results are consistent with the idea that changes in habituation to the reinforcer contribute to behavioral interactions. They help to explain why interactions do not occur for some subjects under conditions that produce them for others. Finally, the results question the assumption that induction and behavioral contrast are always produced by different theoretical mechanisms.